Here's an interesting approach to gun rights.

[normiss 806]

"You certainly give lip service and crocodile tears, that is not in dispute. "

Says Mr. Pot.

[rushmc 23]

YOU throwing the "lip service" card is the funniest damned thing I have seen on this site since I joined.

A first for the perfesser (sic)

Just when I thought I had seen it all

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

You certainly give lip service to rights, that's not in dispute.

Quote

You obviously can't find a single post you've ever made in which you made any proposal to make it more difficult for crazy people like Cho and Loughner to get guns. Not one.

Still can't find a post where I said the innocent deaths didn't matter, eh John? Maybe you should give up on that tactic before you look even MORE the fool.

We're still waiting on your future telepathy machine to know when someone is going to snap. 20/20 hindsight isn't proof, perfesser.

Quote

And you give knee-jerk opposition to any proposal made by others.

And you have nothing BUT knee-jerk accusations and lies about pro-gun folks as an argument.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Several posts in this thread. Even mnealtx agreed that I had indeed done it

Yes, I did say that after several YEARS of sidestepping the issue, you finally made a concrete statement regarding what you thought purchase qualifications should be.

References to blind squirrels and nuts came to mind.

Of course, the problem with the proposal, as I pointed out, was that the checks done for your suggestion were the same as what is done on the Federal level for purchase, so your 'suggestion' was actually the "no change" that you continually accuse pro-2nd folks of supporting.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Still can't find a post where I said the innocent deaths didn't matter, eh John? Maybe you should give up on that tactic before you look even MORE the fool.

Since I have not disputed your lip service and crocodile tears over the victims, I don't have to. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

He knows what happens here when all see his proposals for the bans they are

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

Funny, just this very morning your good buddy mnealtx admitted that I had indeed made a proposal. I guess his memory is better than yours (or he knows how to use the search function).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

He knows what happens here when all see his proposals for the bans they are

Tell that to the Texans who have obtained CCW permits using the same criteria I suggested.

Tell that to gun owners in states that require a NICS check on private purchases at gun shows.

Sometimes your comments are so uninformed it seems you are really trying to discredit your own position.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Quote

Several posts in this thread. Even mnealtx agreed that I had indeed done it

Yes, I did say that after several YEARS of sidestepping the issue, you finally made a concrete statement regarding what you thought purchase qualifications should be.

.

Well, gee, what a GRACIOUS admission that I am right and you, kelpdiver, rushmc and kennedy are wrong.

Thank you, I hope I can be as gracious when I am wrong

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

He knows what happens here when all see his proposals for the bans they are

Tell that to the Texans who have obtained CCW permits using the same criteria I suggested.

Tell that to gun owners in states that require a NICS check on private purchases at gun shows.

Sometimes your comments are so uninformed it seems you are really trying to discredit your own position.

Now we are talking CCW and not just gun ownership??

You have a hard time defending your position when you jump around so much.

In any event
Most places (not all) have what you say here already.

Has these requirements stopped all gun violence?

Just like the laws stopping all drunk driving?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

He knows what happens here when all see his proposals for the bans they are

Tell that to the Texans who have obtained CCW permits using the same criteria I suggested.

Tell that to gun owners in states that require a NICS check on private purchases at gun shows.

Sometimes your comments are so uninformed it seems you are really trying to discredit your own position.

Now we are talking CCW and not just gun ownership??

Please try to pay attention, it would make a refreshing change.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,032]

Please tell us, miss:

Do you think the current state of the laws that allow disturbed people like Cho and Loughner easily to obtain weapons with which they then massacre a bunch of people is the best that can be accomplished in the USA? Yes or no?

Does it concern you that the USA has the highest rate of gun homicides among first-world countries? Yes or no?

Can you come up with one idea of your own that would make it more difficult for the likes of CHo and Loughner to obtain guns? Yes or no?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[normiss 806]

You seem to think you're the genius with the magical ability to see into the future as to when a 'nutter' is going to snap - until this is actually possible I think it's wrong to erode everyone's rights. We have penalties for those crimes once they do. We will never be able to prevent crime.
We have repeatedly decided as a nation that we support private gun sales.
Unless we tighten up the rules for that or require an "ID" of sorts showing someone has been 'cleared' to purchase, people will always push the limits and make questionable sales.
We have the highest rate of heart disease that kills thousands more than guns and nobody bitches about the poison 'food' that places like McDonalds pushes on our society - why should a tool be any different???


But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

[rushmc 23]

But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

[kallend 2,032]

They are simple and relevant questions just requiring yes/no answers. Your inability to answer them honestly illustrates the poverty of your position.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

+1

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

+1

Still can't use the search function? I understand your frustration.

You are a grumpy little dude today arent ya

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,032]

Please tell us, Marc:

Do you think the current state of the laws that allow disturbed people like Cho and Loughner easily to obtain weapons with which they then massacre a bunch of people is the best that can be accomplished in the USA? Yes or no?

Does it concern you that the USA has the highest rate of gun homicides among first-world countries? Yes or no?

Can you come up with just one idea of your own that would make it more difficult for the likes of CHo and Loughner to obtain guns? Yes or no?

Try not to weasel out of answering, they are easy questions.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Please tell us, Marc:

Do you think the current state of the laws that allow disturbed people like Cho and Loughner easily to obtain weapons with which they then massacre a bunch of people is the best that can be accomplished in the USA? Yes or no? I reject your premise but, to do better than you do putting your positions out for all to see, yes, the laws are adequate. There are processes that could be improved to identify those who have been legally shown to have diminished capacities. I will ask you again, how would you accomplished your stated goal?

Does it concern you that the USA has the highest rate of gun homicides among first-world countries? Yes or no? Of course. As do all of ways we die. As I am concerned about car deaths, skydiving deaths, heath deaths. But again you frame a question to avoid an honest debate so I answerd the best I could under your framing. Again, What would you do?

Can you come up with just one idea of your own that would make it more difficult for the likes of CHo and Loughner to obtain guns? Yes or no? Like what? Banning guns? Making it easier for those like you to reduce a named constitutional right would only sereve to keep the law abiding unarmed. Those who do not pay attention to laws about guns will get gun or find a way to do the killing anyway. So, as I stated before, If we wish to operate within the guidlines of our Constitution I find it hard to see what might have kept these two from getting a gun. You? We have laws against drunk driving. Has that stopped the deaths?

Try not to weasel out of answering, they are easy questions.

Irony score here makes the machine explode John. You are one of the most evasive when it comes to explaining a positon, stance or idea as there is anybody here.
And you do it with insult and covered PA's. So I hope you understand why I find this last line of yours so arrogant

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Now, how about showing us where YOU, mnealtx, have made a concrete proposal that goes beyond hand wringing, crocodile tears and lip service.

you have yet to make a concrete proposal yourself, preferring instead to stick to hand wringing and lip service.

Funny, just this very morning your good buddy mnealtx admitted that I had indeed made a proposal. I guess his memory is better than yours (or he knows how to use the search function).

after years of watching you dance on a pin, he's willing to accept a lower bar for you. His choice.

If you had a proposal you could actually stand on, you'd be willing to clearly articulate it, and more than once. But in reality, it's a 2x4 plant on top of quicksand.

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

+1

Still can't use the search function? I understand your frustration.

You are a grumpy little dude today arent ya

He just doesn't care for anyone named Marc.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

But in all seriousness -So long as you desire to make insulting comments and borderline PA's, I could give a fuck what you think or care to ask me.

+1

Still can't use the search function? I understand your frustration.

You are a grumpy little dude today arent ya

He just doesn't care for anyone named Marc.

Good for me then huh
I notice he is not answering his own questions either

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 806]

Unlike yourself, I did answer your idiotic questions.
Parry.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Several posts in this thread. Even mnealtx agreed that I had indeed done it

Yes, I did say that after several YEARS of sidestepping the issue, you finally made a concrete statement regarding what you thought purchase qualifications should be.

.

Well, gee, what a GRACIOUS admission that I am right and you, kelpdiver, rushmc and kennedy are wrong.

Wrong again - as the part that you mysteriously managed to not copy said, the checks Texas does for CCW license are the same as the Federal checks for purchase.

So, your suggestion is really the same status quo that you say is so ineffective.

Quote

Thank you, I hope I can be as gracious when I am wrong

Given the number of times you've been wrong w/o any admission - not hardly.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706